Share this story

What would you do if your "Windows Vista Capable" PC purchased just before the new OS was released could only run Vista Home Basic? If you're a Washington State consumer, you might sue the company.

That's exactly what several Washington PC buyers did back in March when they filed suit against Microsoft over the upgrade program; these are people who are serious about their desire for Aero (Microsoft has since tweaked the definition of "Vista capable" to prevent any confusion). In October, the plaintiffs attempted to expand their case into a full nationwide class-action lawsuit against Microsoft, and the company has now responded.

The plaintiffs claim that the entire "Windows Vista Capable" program was little more than a marketing campaign designed to keep profits high during the transition from XP to Vista. The "Windows Vista Capable" sticker told consumers that "their soon-to-be-obsolete XP PCs were 'Windows Vista Capable' state-of-the-art," said the class action request.

But is it?

The problem, from the plaintiffs' perspective, is that Windows Vista Capable meant only that the machines had the ability to run Windows Vista Home Basic. This, the most basic version of Vista, doesn't support the Aero interface or plenty of other desirable goodies, and the plaintiffs claim that Home Basic "is not the 'real' Vista marketed by Microsoft." The entire OS version was little more than a "gimmick" that kept sales of XP-equipped laptops strong in the holiday season before Vista's launch.

Because some of these machines turned out to be incapable of running more expensive versions of Vista, the plaintiffs have sought to turn the case into a nationwide class-action lawsuit against Microsoft. They argue that consumers were deceived by the "capable" branding into believing that they could get the full benefits of Vista, including the Aero interface, on their machines, but that many of the key features Microsoft advertised in Vista remained out of reach.

Microsoft filed its response to this request under seal just before Thanksgiving; Todd Bishop at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer has made the redacted version (PDF) of the response available, though it doesn't yet appear to be in the online docket for the case.

Microsoft criticizes the plaintiffs for focusing on "a small (less than a square inch) sticker" and not considering the broad array of things it did as part of the Windows Vista Capable program. The company claims that it made clear through "a comprehensive marketing campaign" what the sticker meant, and that arguing over interpretations of the word "capable" without reference to these broader efforts isn't a fair way to proceed.

The company also contends that Home Basic does deliver "innovations in core operating system experiences, including security, reliability and management of the PC, organizing, managing and finding information." In other words, Home Basic is a "real" version of Vista that simply lacks a few premium features such as Aero.

Consumers that wanted the full premium experience from Vista should have purchased a "Premium Ready" PC, says Microsoft. It notes that "neither plaintiff chose" to do this. Countering claims that this information was hard to find or too confusing, the company's filing points to numerous articles in the New York Times, Consumer Reports, and more that described the upgrade options correctly.

The judge overseeing the case will rule shortly on whether it can be expanded into a nationwide class-action suit.